Abstract
This paper summarizes the findings from a K-6 professional development program that emphasized scientific inquiry and nature of science within the theme of scientific modeling. During the 2-week summer workshop and follow up school year workshops, the instruction modeled a 5-E learning cycle approach. Pre and posttesting measured teachers’ views of nature of science, inquiry, and scientific modeling. Teachers improved their views of nature of science (NOS) and inquiry by including scientific modeling in their definitions of how scientists work, the empirical nature of science, and the role of observations and inferences in science. Their definitions of science expanded from a knowledge-based orientation to a process-based orientation. Teachers added the use of mathematical formulas to their views of scientific modeling. Using scientific modeling as the central theme was effective in providing positive influence on teachers’ views of inquiry and NOS.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of a reflective activity-based approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 295–317.
Akerson, V. L., Hanson, D. L., & Cullen, T. A. (2007). The influence of guided inquiry and explicit instruction on K-6 teachers’ views of nature of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 751–772.
Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. (2005). A collaborative endeavor to teach the nature of scientific inquiry: There’s more to science than meets the “I”. In R. A. Yager (Ed.), Exemplary science: Best practices in professional development (pp. 1–12). Arlington: NSTA Press.
Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: The results of a three-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 653–680.
Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & Roth McDuffie, A. (2006). One course is not enough: Preservice elementary teachers’ retention of improved views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 194–213.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bentley, M. L., (2003). The influence of the modeling of inquiry-based science teaching by science faculty in P-12 teacher professional development programs. A paper presented at the 2003 annual meeting for the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New Orleans, LA.
Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cartier, J., Rudolph, J., & Stewart, J. (2001). The nature and structure of scientific models. Working paper. University of Wisconsin, Madison. Retrieved August 14, 2007, from http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/ncisla/publications/reports/Models.pdf.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Eichinger, J. (2005). Using models effectively. Science and Children, 42(7), 43–45.
Hitt, A., & Townsend, J. S. (2004). Models that matter. Science Teacher, 71(3), 29–31.
Karplus, R., & Thier, H. D. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Science curriculum improvement study. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Kielborn, T. L., & Gilmer, P. J. (Eds.). (1999). Meaningful science: Teachers doing inquiry + teaching science. Tallahassee, FL: SERVE.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Lawson, A. E., Abraham, M. R., & Renner, J. W. (1989). A theory of instruction: Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills. (Monograph of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, No. 1), NARST, Cincinnati, OH.
Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions about the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331–359.
Lederman, J. S., & Khishfe, R. (2002). Views of nature of science, Form D2. Unpublished paper. Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL.
Lederman, J. S., & Ko, E. (2004). Views of scientific inquiry, Form E. Unpublished paper. Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL.
Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2004). Revising instruction to teach nature of science. The Science Teacher, 71(9), 31–39.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
National Resource Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ostlund, K., & Mercier, S. (1999). Rising to the challenge of the National Science Education Standards: The processes of science inquiry-primary grades. Squaw Valley, CA: S&K Associates.
Roth, W. M. (1995). Authentic school science. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (1999). Teachers’ knowledge of models and modeling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(11), 1141–1153.
Van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. V. (2002). Experienced teachers’ knowledge of teaching and learning of models and modeling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1255–1272.
Welch, W. W., Klopfer, L. E., & Aikenhead, G. E. (1981). The role of inquiry in science education: Analysis and recommendations. Science Education, 65, 33–50.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Structure of summer workshop
Day | Intervention/Class | Class description/Topics |
|---|---|---|
Monday AM | Introduction/Pretest & Modeling (Summer Jobs) | Introduction to mathematical modeling and application to teaching science |
Monday PM | Process skills including modeling | “Model an Axolotl” lesson using process skills and culminating in modeling activity (learning cycle format) |
Tuesday AM | NOS & Inquiry | Introduce nature of science aspects to teachers |
Help teachers recognize science as inquiry and different types of inquiry, which then allow teachers to emphasize the nature of science aspects | ||
Tuesday PM | Evolution (including the learning cycle) | Introduce the 5-E Learning Cycle model and different levels of inquiry (open, guided, structured, directed) |
Engage teachers as students in “Too many” learning cycle including over-reproduction in fruit flies & dandelions | ||
Engage teachers as students in “Studying the Past” learning cycle including fossil bone & animal tracks inferences | ||
Wednesday AM | Biodiversity | Engage teachers as students in “Living/Nonliving” learning cycle including NOS discussion of how we know about life |
Engage teachers as students in “Cell Diversity” learning cycle including microscope work with plant & animal cells | ||
Engage teachers as students in “Flower Pollination Adaptation” learning cycle including flower modeling | ||
Wednesday PM | Interdependence of life | Introduction to biodiversity and how interdependent the components of an ecosystem are. Modeling of basic forest food chains and food webs. Bottle biology eco-columns |
Thursday AM | FOSS for K-5 w/connections for 6th grade | Engage teachers in pedagogical strategies for incorporating NOS and inquiry and into their textbook science series. Focus on integrating other subject into science activities |
Examples of inquiries: mystery boxes, children’s literature, cotton ball catapults, sound | ||
Thursday PM | FOSS for K-5 w/connections for 6th grade | Teachers looked through curriculum to find examples of inquiry based activities and challenged to rewrite cookbook activities into a inquiry format |
Debriefed cotton ball activity with graduate physics instructor to explain concepts used in activity | ||
Friday AM | Human Identity / Body | Engage teachers as students in studying cells in an inquiry format emphasizing NOS aspects |
Engage teachers in a learning cycle format to study viruses using an interactive human modeling scenario | ||
Engaged teachers as students in an interactive human modeling about the digestive system | ||
Friday PM | Unit Planning | Teachers met in grade level groups to select unit topics |
Monday AM | Modeling activity (Bigfoot) | Demonstrate a guided inquiry and mathematical modeling. |
Monday PM | Group Work | Teachers worked on developing their units |
Tuesday AM | Models Misconception s/Developmental Issues | Describe Piaget’s stages, developmental aspects of teaching models, novice & expert views of models, strategies for teaching using models |
Tuesday PM | Group Work | Teachers worked on developing their units |
Wednesday AM | Group Work | Teachers worked on developing their units |
Wednesday PM | Human Activity | Engaged the teachers in an inquiry solving the mystery of the ultra-violet beads and leading to a discussion of related environmental problems. Debriefed NOS aspects into discussion. Introduced aspects of human impact on the environment and overall ecosystem biodiversity, included invasive species of North America |
Thursday AM | Assessing Student Outcomes | Introduce strategies for teachers to assess students’ views of models, NOS aspects, inquiry, and biology content |
Developed rubrics for student assessment. | ||
Thursday PM | Group Work | Teachers worked on completing their units and in designing their presentations |
Friday AM | Endangered/Extinct | Engage teachers as students in “Endangered-Extinct” learning cycle including simulations involving endangered world mammals and locally endangered species |
Engage teachers as students in “Adaptation & Environment” learning cycle including camouflage simulations and cacti modeling | ||
Friday PM | Group Presentations Posttest/Planning | Teachers presented their units to their peers |
About this article
Cite this article
Akerson, V.L., Townsend, J.S., Donnelly, L.A. et al. Scientific Modeling for Inquiring Teachers Network (SMIT’N): The Influence on Elementary Teachers’ Views of Nature of Science, Inquiry, and Modeling. J Sci Teacher Educ 20, 21–40 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-008-9116-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-008-9116-5